ETERNITY: Screaming Fire in an Empty Theatre

[Queen E]

Mr. DeMille, I'm ready for my close up.

[Nickim]

Wow, Erin, this was a great review.

You are so right. It looks glamorous and fun to stare in movies and TV shows, but it's still work. I saw an interview with Renee Zellwigger where she said she never eats in public, because of how bad she looks in the papparazzi pictures. I think it would be horrible to have every second of one's life scrutinized.

Cordelia says, regarding Rebecca Lowell, “Just knowing a star makes your life better. I’d do anything to live in her world!” At this juncture, Cordy has no idea what that entails: a constant pressure to stay in the public eye, deal with adoring fans, and stay young forever.

I really liked what you said here:

The lesson here is, too much truth will only alienate you and those around you. Angelus doesn’t care about that, but Angel does. No one wants to be alone. Perhaps the truth, tactfully given, is the best we can hope for....

Which is the true face of Angel? The one who lies to Cordelia to spare her feelings, or the one who attacks Rebecca and tears Cordelia’s performance to shreds? That question is never really answered, but the readiness with which Angelus appears when Angel’s defenses are down point to the idea that he is never far away.

Angel is like someone with multiple personality disorder. Liam was the "orginal personality," then Angelus, and finally Angel. I'd have to say that Angelus is much closer to the "true face" than Angel. Liam wasn't a particularly nice person before being turned and Angelus seemed to tap into that meanness and bring to it's nasty potential.

[Rachael]

I read it, I loved it as usual, I'm short on time right this second, but:

Which is the true face of Angel? The one who lies to Cordelia to spare her feelings, or the one who attacks Rebecca and tears Cordelia’s performance to shreds? That question is never really answered, but the readiness with which Angelus appears when Angel’s defenses are down point to the idea that he is never far away.

I think that the thing that Angel (and others around him) are always missing is that both of these (and lots of others) are the "real" Angel. As with most people, there are lots of "versions" of Angel, and the trick is to integrate them so that you control them, not the other way around. The scarier they are, the harder this is to admit and understand, and thus the longer the road to integration and control.

Off to work soon!

[Queen E]

Nicki said:

Wow, Erin, this was a great review.

Thank you! It was fun to write.

You are so right. It looks glamorous and fun to stare in movies and TV shows, but it's still work. I saw an interview with Renee Zellwigger where she said she never eats in public, because of how bad she looks in the papparazzi pictures. I think it would be horrible to have every second of one's life scrutinized.

I agree; it reminds me very much of later seasons where the press were talking about DB looking older and chunkier, when he's not supposed to age. Well, it's a TV show, and time marches on, so...duh! He's going to look older. I can't imagine how awful that would be, having people think they can say and write anything about you because you're in the public eye.

Angel is like someone with multiple personality disorder. Liam was the "orginal personality," then Angelus, and finally Angel. I'd have to say that Angelus is much closer to the "true face" than Angel. Liam wasn't a particularly nice person before being turned and Angelus seemed to tap into that meanness and bring to it's nasty potential.

Angelus definitely represents Liam unfettered. We really see that in Season 4. The worst damage Angelus does is with his tongue; manipulating the truth to cause the maximum amount of pain. Liam himself wasn't so much evil, in my view, as lazy and very immature. He was more id than anything else. But, then again, when all you do is think about your own needs (as Rebecca does in this episode), your "good" intentions cannot override the evil that it causes.

[Queen E]

Rachael said:

I read it, I loved it as usual, I'm short on time right this second, but:



I think that the thing that Angel (and others around him) are always missing is that both of these (and lots of others) are the "real" Angel. As with most people, there are lots of "versions" of Angel, and the trick is to integrate them so that you control them, not the other way around. The scarier they are, the harder this is to admit and understand, and thus the longer the road to integration and control.

Off to work soon!

Which is why we see, in Season 5, Spike defeat Angel for the "cup." Spike has come a long way in integrating the good and the bad in himself. However, Mr. Pre-Show takes so much pleasure in the darkest aspects, it's easy to see why Angel has such a difficult time accepting it.

[Lola m]

Well, gosh darn it, you done another great analysis, Erin!

All the bits about people playing parts – perfect to have started the episode with a (horrible) scene from a play. And thanks for reminding me that it was A Doll’s House – rather appropriate, as you said, considering the story we will get about Rebecca!

Loved your collection of parallels and comparisons between Angel and Rebecca. Being, to some extent, “forever young”, frozen in time; surrounded by people, but questioning if they are really connected (the particular thing that Doyle wanted to stress to Angel – the reason TPTB sent him to Angel); the artificiality surrounding them; the synthetic happiness; and their shadow selves (Angelus and Raven). We get to see Angelus emerge briefly. I must admit, I’m slightly curious to see what the character of Raven was like. It might have been fun if they would have created and shown us a brief “clip” from the imaginary show. I would have been interested to see if they would have made it a sort of parody of BtVS. (I too have always wondered if Rebecca is somewhat modeled on SMG. )

Interesting comparison, also, about Angel and Rebecca’s respective “people”. Cordy and Wes, as you mention, show how they are truly becoming friends, family actually, at the end. But I liked how you don’t necessarily rule out the possibility that Oliver, in his own warped way, also sees himself as really a friend – really does love Rebecca, even if he have absolutely no idea of the right way to show this.

Very interesting and new (to me) line of thought when you say:

Angel pegs her motivation for being turned immediately: “This isn’t about the way the studio, the network, or the fans see you. It’s about how you see yourself. Your own reflection has been corrupted into something unrecognizable. You think you want to stay the same? What you really want is to make it disappear.” That is one of the least discussed benefits of vampirism on Buffy and Angel. You can commit all sorts of heinous acts, and do not have to look at yourself afterwards. This is the reverse of Rebecca’s problem; she has to look at what she was constantly.

I’d never thought about vampirism that way. The lack of reflection being a metaphor for not being able to/having to look at your own actions – no looking inside, no “self-reflection” as it were. And then this is of course a big factor in a vampire lack of conscience.

Glad that you mentioned the “mystery” of the simulated happiness bringing out Angelus for a brief moment. Something I have always wondered about for a bit. In particular, I love how you once again brought up the theme of acting with Cordy’s performance and the character of Alceste. Perfect closing thoughts for an episode that dealt so directly with issues around acting and “what’s real”.

As always, thanks for making me think, Erin!

Lola

[Riff]

As always, you go right to heart of the theme. This ep is all about playing parts.

Eetah on the parallels you uncover between Angel and Raven.

That is one of the least discussed benefits of vampirism on Buffy and Angel. You can commit all sorts of heinous acts, and do not have to look at yourself afterwards. This is the reverse of Rebecca’s problem; she has to look at what she was constantly.

And yet Darla, Dru, and Harmony all have such impeccable makeup.

It’s an interesting metaphor for loss of the soul (conscience) that I’ve never really considered until you pointed it out.

The emergence of Angelus in this episode is a controversial one; why should he come forth after induced, unreal “happiness”? Regardless of the method, Angelus is the only one who consistently tells the truth, or at least, his version of it. Yet it’s Cordelia’s “Oscar-caliber” bluff that brings him down. In Moliere’s The Misanthrope, the main character, Alceste, refused to play the game of “polite discourse.” He told the unvarnished truth in every situation. At the end of the play, he absents himself from society altogether. The lesson here is, too much truth will only alienate you and those around you. Angelus doesn’t care about that, but Angel does. No one wants to be alone. Perhaps the truth, tactfully given, is the best we can hope for; unless, of course, you’re Cordelia. Strangely, once Angelus lets loose with his brand of honesty, the air is cleared for Angel, Wes, and Cordelia to stop being careful with one another and build something “real” together.

The thing I really want to provide feedback on is the Angel/Angelus issue. I read the episode slightly differently here.

If I might quote Wes a few times: “It’s synthetic – not true happiness.”; “He hasn’t really turned. It’s an illusion – not real.”; “Angel, I want you to listen to me. What you’re experiencing is not genuine. You’ve been fed a drug. It’s simulating bliss. All that you’re feeling is just chemical suggestion.”

And then, three seasons later, here’s Wes again in Soulless: “I've imagined this moment many times. Years of study, research... I've read everything ever written about you...”

Clearly, Wesley believes Angel has not turned in Eternity, and in Soulless all but tells us he is having his first meeting with Angelus.

What I got from the ep was the more disturbing idea that Angel merely believes he has become Angelus, and this provides him with an excuse (for himself) to give his darker nature free reign. In other words, at some level Angel chooses to act in the way he does, rather than Angelus “happening” to him. Ironically, although he implies he is “the real me” (Angelus) after Rebecca drugs him, in fact he is only playing at being Angelus.

Angelus, then, does not appear in the episode. If that is the case, it is Angel who feels the desire to say what he does to Cordy and Wes. I realise this is a simplification, but if we think of Angel as the human and Angelus as the demon sides of the dual being that is a vampire in the Jossverse, what is released by Rebecca is the monstrous side of a human, one given licence.

As I said, this is a simplification. Rachael is absolutely right that Angelus is one part of Angel, and that people around him miss this. I would say that when characters are misunderstood in the Jossverse, it is often because people can only see the most obvious aspect of their persona.

Whenever Angelus is freed, he is no longer integrated into Angel and so he becomes an entirely different character. So, although Angelus is always present, because Angel does not actually turn in the ep and become this different character (integration is still there), it is a darkness in Angel (not a darkness called Angelus) that comes out. *laughs* I hope that makes some sense.

I think it's reasonable to suggest that Angel's human self can be bad without the influence of Angelus. Having said that, he's considerably more moral than most people - a drug was required in this one unique case.

Long may you reign, Erin.

[Rachael]

So, remotely apropos of this discussion - today's Angel was "Redefinition", and when Darla said, "That wasn't Angel. Wasn't Angelus, either. Who was that?" after Angel lit them on fire, I thought of the integration of Angel/Angelus/Liam conversation.

Because she's wrong - it was Angel. Just - a different face of Angel. "Good" Angel with Angelus-type behavior, nonetheless. And because Darla's pretty much arrested, personality-development-wise, because of the whole no-soul, undead thing, she doesn't get that.

[Queen E]

Rachael said:

So, remotely apropos of this discussion - today's Angel was "Redefinition", and when Darla said, "That wasn't Angel. Wasn't Angelus, either. Who was that?" after Angel lit them on fire, I thought of the integration of Angel/Angelus/Liam conversation.

Because she's wrong - it was Angel. Just - a different face of Angel. "Good" Angel with Angelus-type behavior, nonetheless. And because Darla's pretty much arrested, personality-development-wise, because of the whole no-soul, undead thing, she doesn't get that.

I agree. And I think an argument could be made that Season 2 Angel is the closest to integration of his two personalities that we see.